The text of the post was the same for all participants, but the tone of the comments varied. Sometimes, they were "civil"—e.g., no name calling or flaming. But sometimes they were more like this: "If you don’t see the benefits of using nanotechnology in these products, you're an idiot."

The researchers were trying to find out what effect exposure to such rudeness had on public perceptions of nanotech risks. They found that it wasn't a good one. Rather, it polarized the audience: Those who already thought nanorisks were low tended to become more sure of themselves when exposed to name-calling, while those who thought nanorisks are high were more likely to move in their own favored direction. In other words, it appeared that pushing people's emotional buttons, through derogatory comments, made them double down on their preexisting beliefs.

Proglibocrats froth at the mouth slandering others with the racist badge, so I was just making sure it was clear._________________Ladies and gentlemen, allow me to present, Man Not Caring. -- Perry Cox

There's no need to be niggardly with explanations when it comes to racism. Who knows what people might think if I coloured the conversation with innocent words that could enslave this thread and become fodder for the reactionary black hearts of equal rights trolls.

There's no need to be niggardly with explanations when it comes to racism. Who knows what people might think if I coloured the conversation with innocent words that could enslave this thread and become fodder for the reactionary black hearts of equal rights trolls.